Subject: [Pesci-discuss] pesci-next-steps general approach

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 02:17:51 +0100

The proposed Draft actually lead to the list in part 3. I am 
embrassed about it. I read it as a "bottom-up" thinking, where a 
bootstrap would have a "top-down" thinking. I mean that the basis is 
"what are the tasks we currently face?". While an initial thinking 
would be "what are our intended deliverables, how will we manage to 
deliver them?". I feel the intent more as a fix than a re-build? Both 
are changes. I felt Brian wanted something more a re-build mechanism 
than a fix?

I know it is not easy, but I would rather say:
- what do we want to deliver?
- how could we do it? Here the different propositions the same.
- what does experience has to say?
- what is the solution we want?
- how do we transition to it?
considering the whole IETF at the same time. Considering the IESG 
first and other issues afterward will lead to organise new responses 
to current needs, possibly organising new non-IESG solutions, the 
step further may change, asking for a new IESG change again?

For example, what if the best solution is the end of the IESG and a 
totally new IETF structure. How could we consider this with this 
process? Or may be I did not understood the complete idea?
jfc

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss